I want it!

[Mike Buckley]

This product would be ideal for my makeshift studio because of its ease of use in a cramped space. If it is released at about $150, I definitely would think seriously about reserving my tripod for outdoor use and using this product for tabletop photography.

[Shadowman]

Looks useful, thanks for link.

[ionian]

Looks awesome, particularly if it doesn't suffer from any creep when left in place.

[Manfred M]

Call my a cynic, but the whole design is structurally extremely weak. You have two separate cantilevered arms holding the camera with a fairly thin frame; something is going to move and vibrate. Is it going to lock and hold exactly the position you want it to? That seems doubtful to me.

The rule of thumb for products has been that the total cost of raw materials should not exceed 10% of the final selling price (the rest covers manufacturing labour, overhead cost allocation and profit margins), so this unit will likely have at best $15 in material costs for a product that will sell for $150.

So we have a product that is not particularly strong and made of perhaps $15 of raw materials. I think one might be suspicious of the claims made by the manufacturer.

[Mike Buckley]

We have no idea what the cost of the product is going to be. We also have no idea about the materials the product is made of, so we also have no idea about whether something is going to move and vibrate. We also have no idea of the amount of weight and focal length the product is promised to hold without moving or vibrating. Most important, lacking all that and other information, there is absolutely no basis for determining that the product is particularly strong, weak or whatever, mostly because strength and weakness is a helpful description only in the context of what is being held. (I would normally be attaching a relatively light camera with a relatively light prime lens attached.)

I mentioned the $150 price only because that's about the maximum price that would make the product appealing enough to me to justify a purchase instead of continuing with my current tripod.

[Manfred M]

We have no idea what the cost of the product is going to be. We also have no idea about the materials the product is made of, so we also have no idea about whether something is going to move and vibrate. Most important, lacking all that and other information, there is absolutely no basis for determining that the product is particularly strong, weak or whatever.

Sorry, I mis-understood the price side, I thought this was an estimated price, rather than what you would hope it would sell for. I had based my opinion based on this price point. At a higher price point and with more advanced materials, tooling and manufacturing technology, yes, then I think this could work, BUT the triple cantilever design still makes me a bit leery.

I'm trying to figure out how you can place a camera with different lenses and accessories on a triple arm cantilevered device (four points of rotation) and how to get each link to support differing camera / lens / accessory weights without individually tweaking each joint. This is not a trivial design task, but seems to be the way the demo video seems to suggest the device works.

There seem to be a significant number of fairly complex interactions when the device is locked, opened and closed, so again complexity tends to be something that adds costs to a device. Things that are complex tend to break more easily too.

[Mike Buckley]

The devil will surely be in the details. Considering that the device is clearly intended primarily for indoor use and always only in an area with a flat surface, I'm making an educated guess that it will be fine for use with the camera and lenses I can use in the limitations of my makeshift studio. If it can't be used with that equipment, it probably can't be used with any prosumer or pro DSLR being manufactured today. Such an extreme limitation wouldn't make any sense.

[Manfred M]

I just found their website (not really hard), but having spent a few minutes there, this all makes more sense to me now. These guys appear to specialize in video rigging and attachments for DSLRs used in video production.

This piece of gear make a lot of sense for a B-roll setup. All one has to do is get the camera into a position that is close enough and start rolling once everything has settled down. This would be quite different than shooting from a photo tripod.

[Mike Buckley]

If their gear is as good as the music in the demonstration videos, their gear is quite good.

[AlwaysOnAuto]

I watched the video earlier this morning. What scared me was how it started swaying as he took his foot off the bottom. I think it'd be very easy to tip over if the camera/lens combo isn't carefully checked for balance before 'letting go'.
I could see this being made out of some sort of injection molded reinforced plastic with metal bushing/inserts where needed.

[Mike Buckley]

I don't see any swaying in the video despite that I have looked for it now that you have mentioned it. Even so, it makes sense that we would want to check for stability before letting go, which is what we have to do with a tripod. As an example, I'm notorious for tightening the knob that controls the tripod's center shaft thinking that I am tightening the knob that controls the head. So, I always check before letting go of the camera.

[AlwaysOnAuto]

Mike, I just don't see this setup being as inherently stable as a tripod. On a tripod the weight is at the top of the pyramid if you will, while with this setup it's tied into the stabilizing arms, if you will call them that, at the bottom.

Once I looked at it I thought, gee, I'll just take an old chair with the 5-spoke wheel/lift mechanism and put a mono-pod on it with a ball head attached.
I know, not the same by a long shot, but that's just how the stability of the thing hit me.

[Mike Buckley]

You might be right, Alan; I have no idea how stable it is. For now, I'm taking the word of the marketing that it's a suitable replacement for a tripod. The text explains that it's a substitute. The video displays the photographer walking away from the unit. I'll be eager to see both the price and the specs.

I'm certain that this type of product can be designed to be as stable as a tripod but of course have no idea if it has been designed that way. As an example, the Gorillapod tripods work well so long as one doesn't use them with a camera-lens combination and at a tilt that are too extreme for the design of the system. I can easily imagine the same being true for this product.

Moreover, I can easily imagine that it would be stable enough for my typical use. The video displays a camera and zoom lens. My use would involve a camera and lens that have the combined weight of only the camera displayed in the video.

[Black Pearl]

If Mike wants to use it in a small studio with controlled conditions then it doesn't have to be as good as a tripod or even as stable as a tripod it just needs to be good enough and stable enough to enable him to take the shots he requires.

How often do you need long exposure times for typical tabletop work where absolute stability is key?
How often will the camera need to be triggered without either a remote of some kind or even a simple time delay?
How often will letting the camera settle (assuming it needs to) be such an issue that it makes using this troublesome?

The key is this - if it is good enough to replace a tripod for the type of shooting you intend then it is good enough to replace a tripod.

[Mike Buckley]

How often do you need long exposure times for typical tabletop work where absolute stability is key?

I'll need that regularly because exposures are often up to ten seconds and sometimes twice that long. That's because I often use continuous light rather than flash or strobe, very small apertures and the camera's base ISO value. However, this product may provide absolute stability for a camera and lens that weigh only 2 pounds combined, especially considering that the camera not including the lens featured in the video weighs that much.

How often will the camera need to be triggered without either a remote of some kind or even a simple time delay?

Never. I always use a remote shutter release.

How often will letting the camera settle (assuming it needs to) be such an issue that it makes using this troublesome?

Never.

The key is this - if it is good enough to replace a tripod for the type of shooting you intend then it is good enough to replace a tripod.

Exactly. You "get it!"

[Rob Ekins]

Mike,
I think you should definitely get one...then do a CamFi type review so I know what I am in for

[Manfred M]

I'll need that regularly because exposures are often up to ten seconds and sometimes twice that long. That's because I often use continuous light rather than flash or strobe, very small apertures and the camera's base ISO value.

And that is why I wrote what I did in my first response Mike. For your type of shooting absolute stability is important and these long cantilevers are not inherently going to give you that. The level of movement that I am thinking about would not be visible in the video; the amount that I would be thinking about would be measured in mm / fractions of a inch. The issue is that even a small amount of vibration in the base is going to be amplified by the time it reaches the end of the cantilever, where your camera is sitting. That in turn is going to affect the relative amount of blur that will be introduced into an image, based on the distance the camera is from the object and the exposure time. If you were shooting with flash of any kind, this wouldn't really be an issue.

This is also why I suggested that I could see this design being more applicable to cinematic work. The slowest standard frame rate in cinema is 24 frames per second, so the longest exposure would be in the order of 1/25th second. Go to the HD standards and this is easily doubled to 1/50th sec and faster.

[Mike Buckley]

For your type of shooting absolute stability is important and these long cantilevers are not inherently going to give you that.

Not possible to know without seeing the specs and perhaps not possible to know without trying the product.

[Mike Buckley]

Mike,
I think you should definitely get one...then do a CamFi type review so I know what I am in for

I'll be happy to do that. However, I'll probably need your help. I'm a little skeptical that the product will be offered at or below the price of $150 I know I would be willing to spend for it. You might have to pony up the excess funds required to make the purchase.

[Manfred M]

Not possible to know without seeing the specs and perhaps not possible to know without trying the product.

Mike - after about 35 years of design work (closer to 40 years if I include four years of studying mechanical engineering at university), one develops an eye for these things without having to see, touch, feel, study the specs or the engineering drawings. I pick up things that you (and others) watching the video might not notice.

Did you notice that the video is cut as the person releases the camera? I wonder why they chose to cut the video exactly at that point? Actually, that's not true, I pretty sure I do know why. I strongly suspect it is to hide the fact that the device is swaying. In fact, the edit is that not good, check out the 17 - 18 second mark and watch for the amount of sway. This suggests to me that it won't be as stable as a tripod for long exposures and will take some time for the swaying to damp out.

The fixed three-point design suggests you can only use this device on flat, level surface (probably not much of an issue in your small studio, Mike), but to me this is a real world issue that limits where the device can be used.

I also noticed the front leg lift off the ground during the erection process. Again, this could be nothing, but it does suggest that the device is only stable when the camera sits forward of where the column is attached to the base, again, this might not be important to some, but it does restrict how it can be used.

Add to that some of the intrinsic issues related to the cantilever design and load balancing (i.e. the setup is likely sensitive to the position and weight of the camera).

I do think this company has some very interesting products. Their designer seems to love incorporating fairly sophisticated linkages into his or her designs (just look at how some of the other products are set up). The one thing that I do notice about their product line is that with the exception of the StandPLUS, the devices are all relatively small, and are working in a range where the types of issues I am referring to don't come into play. I was almost fooled into thinking they make larger tools (look at their JipPlus), until I realized that neither the jib nor the support are make by Edelkrone.

As for the price point, look at the device that is almost the "baby brother" of the StandPlus. It sells for $US 119.99. A product that is 10 times larger and far more complex is not going to retail for just $US 30 more.

https://www.edelkrone.com/p/463/flex-tilt-head

I do like the specs on some of their products and would love to get my hands on their slider (for time lapse work), but to configure it the way I would like is going to run the cost up over $2K.